The international geography of the rubber industry immediately teaches one that the transport of rubber in an economic and environmentally-sound manner is a requisite in today's world. Over eighty percent of the world's natural rubber production is from the Pacific Rim area, specifically Thailand, Malaysia and Indonesia. But about seventy-five percent of the world's users for natural rubber are found in North America, Europe and Japan. Connecting the producer with the user is only possible by the use of large scale transport methods, such as ocean freighter, and particularly, the use of containerized barge and break-bulk transport in association with ocean freighters.
The current art for transporting rubber is to initially process the latex into a product known in the industry as "TSR Crumb" (Technical Specification Rubber Crumb). Up to the 1960's, rubber was shipped in large bales. Prior to the switch to TSR crumb, rubber was packaged in large loose bales weighing about 250 pounds each. In fact, a certain percentage of the rubber is still transported in this manner. With the switch to TSR crumb, the change in the transport method involved a switch to smaller bales in the range of about 70 to 80 pounds each, although even smaller bales are sometimes preferred, especially for shipment from or into locations where people of smaller stature will be handling the bales. Between 30 to 42 of these bales could be packed in wood crates or on wood pallets for shipment. Differences in the shipping preferences of different producers and consumers resulted in discrepancies in shipping policies. More importantly, wood shipping containers, such as crates or pallets, have provided several problems in the past and newer problems are emerging.
When the rubber was shipped in wood crates, the crates could be stacked four units high, efficiently filling the hold of a transport carrier, such as in a "break bulk" ship. However, the use of crates and/or pallets means that either the crates or pallets need to be transported to the production site for loading or they have to be manufactured in the vicinity of the production site. While wood is certainly available near many rubber production sites, the environmental concerns of deforestation militate against such production. If the crates or pallets need to be shipped to the site, the shipper must take the crates or pallets in lieu of an active cargo, effectively cutting the efficiency of the trip. Additionally, the wood in the crates is subject to infestation by wood borers and insects, which can introduce unwanted and harmful insects into the ecosystem. Further, the weight of the wood in the crates or pallets presents additional weight during shipment of the rubber itself. If this weight could be minimized or eliminated, more rubber could be shipped in a given load.
Some rubber shippers have taken to replacing wood crates with metal crates that lack tops, but are formed so that the bottom of one hingedly attaches to the open top of the metal crate below. While eliminating the problems of infestation or deforestation, this solution does little to prevent the ships from operating at less than optimal capacity, unless the shipper can find a product that can be effectively transported in the metal crates on the trip out to pick up the rubber. Also, as long as the rubber is packed in the metal crate, a substantial portion of the total weight being transported is the dead weight represented by the metal crate.
One alternative to metal or wooden crates is the use of palletized loads. In a shrink-wrapped pallet, at least fifty percent of the wood used in a wood crate can be eliminated, and a pallet can also effectively transport between 30 to 42 of the small bales of 77 pounds each. The rubber product is very sensitive to the pressure resulting from stacking, however. Therefore, both the height of the individual pallet and the ability to stack the pallets one upon the other are both negatively influenced by the tendency of the rubber to fuse and flow from the pressure. The wood pallets are limited to single stacking, although some double stacking will occasionally be done. In either case, valuable head space, particularly in warehouses, goes untilled. In addition, the wood pallets still present the problems of transporting wood crates, such as possible infestation. Even further, some countries, notably Germany, have enacted environmental regulations that essentially have banned the use of one-way wood pallets or crates.
Another problem posed by the older techniques of shipping using wood pallets and wood crates relates to the use of containerized shipping. For example, a pallet or crate having 36 bales of rubber weighing 77 pounds each constitutes 2772 pounds or about 1260 kilograms of rubber, exclusive of the packaging. Sixteen such pallets or crates weigh 44,352 pounds or 20,160 kilograms, again, exclusive of the packaging. In containerized shipping, the overall weight of the container, not the "live" freight weight, must be accounted for in the costs of shipping. If the container must ship with only 15 pallets or crates instead of sixteen, the effective cost of shipping increases over 6%. To look at it in a slightly different manner, to constitute 6% of the total weight of a loaded wooden crate where the rubber on the crate weighs 2772 pounds, the crate would only have to weigh about 175 pounds, which is a quite realistic number. In view of this, the incentives to reduce or entirely eliminate the use of wood are clear, although the inventor is not aware of any others using the type of innovative techniques taught herein.